John Richardson—Why Steve Chalke is mistaken and the liberality of liberals cannot be trusted

Posted by Kendall Harmon

This is why we must also be so cautious when someone like Steve Chalke (and there are many like Steve Chalke) suggests that his views in favour of accepting same-sex practice and the position of those who are opposed can both coexist. In his own words, which I have quoted here, he says that,

Amongst the hallmarks of any and every healthy community must be the ability for reasoned and gracious debate, a willingness to listen to others, an openness to change and a respect for diversity. I write this paper in that spirit, recognising that various friends and leaders whom I respect have views which differ from mine.

So here we have a ‘Rodney King’ approach, with a plea for us all to ‘get along’ despite our differences. And would that we could!

And here is the problem, for injustice, like immorality, cannot be tolerated – or at least, not if we can do anything about it. And Chalke has concluded that we can – indeed public legislation is already ahead of him – in affirming and blessing sexually active same-sex relationships.

Unfortunately, however, this means that despite his expressed desire that diversity should be respected, this cannot be something which ultimately he can either intend or tolerate....

They can’t. Homosexual sex is abnormal. Because it seeks normalization of abnormal behavior it can only do so by coercion. As homosexuals enter an institution they will change it either as others leave or the force those staying to accept and approve their behavior.

Case in point, in the military, wives clubs must now either accept the partners of homosexual military (non-discrimination don’t you know) or be barred from the use of military facilities.

“Amongst the hallmarks of any and every healthy community must be the ability for reasoned and gracious debate..”

In ten years they have never been willing to put forth any theological statement about why they want to bless homosexuality. They claim that it is like being black, but when “To Set Our Hope on Christ” used science that was 10 to 35 years old and discredited to support that, the House of Bishops theology committee pointed out that that statement was not approved by the church. Meanwhile, they have steadfastly refused to debate, because science doesn’t just fail to support them, it often refutes their claim that homosexual is a type of person. See “Why Theology Should Precede Change” on VOL or my book, And the Spirit Led Me, which makes it even more clear.

TEC will not engage in reasoned debate, and instead of being gracious, they call everyone who challenges them a bigot. If they actually did engage, it would be clear that their view of homosexuality is bogus. And they have utterly failed to own up to their failure in this area.